Central Information Commission
Sumit Mitra vs East Coast Railway (Bhubaneswar) on 28 June, 2021
CIC/ECRBH/A/2019/125278
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथ माग,मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं या/ Second Appeal No. CIC/ECRBH/A/2019/125278
In the matter of:
Sumit Mitra ... अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO, ... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Sr. DPO, M/O Railways,
East Coast Railway, RTI Cell,
Divisional Office, Khurda, Odisha
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI Application filed on : 23.02.2019
CPIO replied on : 25.03.2019
First Appeal filed on : 02.04.2019
First Appellate Authority order : 04.04.2019
Second Appeal Received on : 28.05.2019
Date of Decision : 11.06.2021
The following were present:
Appellant: Shri Sumit Mitra participated in the hearing upon being contacted on
his telephone.
Respondent: Shri Ranjan Mohanty, CPIO and Sr. DPO participated in the hearing
upon being contacted on his telephone.
Page 1 of 6
CIC/ECRBH/A/2019/125278
ORDER
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an online RTI Application dated 23.02.2019 seeking information on the following seven points:
"I want the following information/Data/Query/Answers/Copies from CPIO, Khurda Division, Jatni, East Coast Railway, Odisha, PIN-752050 under RTI Act 2005 through Railway Board, New Delhi.
1) True Certified Copy of the Muster Roll (Attendance Sheet) for the Goods Guard (NPS) of Paradeep Base for the month of May 2011.
2) True Certified Copy of the Muster Roll (Attendance Sheet) for the Goods Guard (NPS) of Paradeep Base for the month of July 2011.
3) True Certified Copy of the Muster Roll (Attendance Sheet) for the Goods Guard (NPS) of Paradeep Base for the month of August 2011.
4) True Certified Copy of the Muster Roll (Attendance Sheet) for the Goods Guard (NPS) of Paradeep Base for the month of September 2011.
5) True Certified Copy of the PMC submitted by me (Both Unfit and Fit) for the period 28.03.2011 to 01.04.2011 (Five Days). And True Certificate Copy of the Fitness Certificate issued by Paradeep Railway Medical Officer for the above said period.
6) True Certified Copy of the PMC submitted by me (Both Unfit and Fit) for the period 11.08.2011 to 08.09.2011 (Twenty Nine Days). And True Certificate Copy of the Fitness Certificate issued by Paradeep Railway Medical Officer for the above said period.
7) Name of the Official (With Designation, Current CUG Mobile Number and Current place of Posting( If Retired his Current Address as with Railway Office) who was responsible for maintaining muster Roll both for Paradeep Base and DRM Office in Khurda Division.
8) Name of the Official (With Designation, Current CUG Mobile Number and Current Place of Posting (if Retired his current Address as with Railway Office) who was responsible for maintaining fitness Certificate issued for the above said period in Paradeep Railway Medical."Page 2 of 6
CIC/ECRBH/A/2019/125278 The CPIO vide letter dated 25.03.2019, enclosed a letter endorsed by Shri A. K. Tripathi, Divisional Operations Manager (Chg), E. Co. Railway, Khurda Road, East Coast Railway dated 14.03.2019, wherein the Appellant was informed that the information sought at point nos. 1 to 6 of the RTI Application pertains to old records which is more than 8 years old and despite best of efforts, the said information sought for could not be traced out. With regard to the information sought at point nos. 7 and 8 of the RTI Application, the Appellant was informed that their department does not have any record. Being dissatisfied, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 02.04.2019. The First Appellate Authority vide order dated 04.04.2019, upheld the CPIO's reply.
Grounds for Second Appeal:
The Appellant filed a Second Appeal u/s 19 of the Act on the ground of unsatisfactory reply furnished by the Respondent. He requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to provide complete information sought for.
Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing:
In order to ensure social distancing and prevent the spread of the pandemic, COVID-19, the instant hearing is being scheduled through audio conference after informing both the parties.
The Appellant stated that he is not satisfied with the reply provided by the Respondent. He further stated that the First Appellate Authority has rejected the First Appeal within 2 days from the date of its filing. Upon queried by the Commission as to whether he has received the written submission dated 08.06.2021, he replied in negative. He requested the Commission to direct the Respondent to send a copy of the written submission on his email address [email protected].Page 3 of 6
CIC/ECRBH/A/2019/125278 The Respondent submitted that additional information has been provided to the Appellant after receiving the hearing notice from the Commission. He further submitted that information sought at point nos. 5 and 6 of the RTI Application pertains to Appellant's own documents, which are not available with them. He furthermore submitted that information sought at 7 and 8 of the RTI Application are old records, which are also not available with them.
A written submission has been received by the Commission from Shri Ranjan Mohanty, CPIO & Sr. Divisional Personnel Officer vide letter dated 08.06.2021, wherein he has informed that the attendance register for the said month i.e., information sought at point nos. 1 to 4 of the RTI Application) was found and the same has been handed over to Sr.DPO(Bills)/Kur. A copy of the same has also been marked to the Appellant.
Decision:
Upon perusal of the facts on record as well as on the basis of the proceedings during the hearing, the Commission observes that appropriate information has been provided by the Respondent. The Commission further observes that that Appellant is using RTI Act in seeking his own documents after misplacing it and the same are not permitted for the purpose as held by the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the matter of PIO, High Court Madras Vs. B. Bharathi (W.P No.26781 of 2013) as under:
24. Insofar as query (iv) is concerned, we fail to understand as to how the second respondent is entitled to justify his claim for seeking the copies of his own complaints and appeals. It is needless to say that they are not the information available within the knowledge of the petitioner; on the other hand, admittedly, they are the documents of the second respondent himself, and therefore, if he does not have copies of the same, he has to blame himself and he cannot seek those details as a matter of right, thinking that the High Court will preserve his frivolous applications as treasures/valuable assets.Page 4 of 6
CIC/ECRBH/A/2019/125278 Further, those documents cannot be brought under the definition "information" as defined under Section 2 (f) of the RTI Act. Therefore, we reject the contention of the second respondent in this aspect.
In light of the totality of the circumstances, the Commission upholds the submission of the CPIO. However, to allay the apprehensions of the Appellant, the Commission directs the present CPIO to send a copy of the written submission dated 08.06.2021 alongwith relevant annexures/enclosures to Appellant's email address [email protected], within 10 days from the date of receipt of this order.
With the above observations, the instant Second Appeal is disposed of. Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
The Appeal, hereby, stands disposed of.
Amita Pandove (अिमता पांडव) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) दनांक / Date: 28.06.2021 Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स यािपत ित) B. S. Kasana (बी. एस. कसाना) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26105027 Page 5 of 6 CIC/ECRBH/A/2019/125278 Addresses of the parties:
1. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) ADRM, M/o Railways, East Coast Railway, RTI Cell, Divisional Office, Khurda Road Division, At & Post Jatni, District-Khurda, Odisha -752050
2. The Central Public Information Officer, Sr. DPO, M/O Railways, East Coast Railway, RTI Cell, Divisional Office, Khurda Road Division, At & Post Jatni, District-Khurda, Odisha - 52050.
3. Shri Sumit Mitra Page 6 of 6